#intelectual universal

[bocadosdefilosofia]

«Hace ya bastantes años que no se le pide al intelectual que juegue ese papel. Un nuevo modo de “ligazón entre la teoría y la práctica” se ha constituido. Los intelectuales se han habituado a trabajar no en el “universal”, en el “ejemplar”, en el “justo-y-verdadero para todos”, sino en sectores específicos, en puntos precisos en los que situaban sus condiciones de trabajo, o sus condiciones de vida (la vivienda, el hospital, el manicomio, el laboratorio, la universidad, las relaciones familiares o sexuales). Han adquirido así una conciencia mucho más inmediata y concreta de las luchas. Y han encontrado problemas que eran determinados, “no universales”, diferentes con frecuencia de los del proletariado y las masas. Y entre tanto se han acercado realmente, creo, por dos razones: porque se trata de luchas reales, materiales, cotidianas, y porque encontraban con frecuencia, pero bajo una forma distinta, el mismo adversario que el proletariado, el campesinado o las masas (las multinacionales, el aparato judicial y policial, la especulación inmobiliaria, etc.): es lo que llamaré intelectual “específico” por oposición al intelectual “universal”.»

Michel Foucault: «Verdad y poder», en Microfísica del poder. Las Ediciones de la Piqueta, págs. 183-184. Madrid, 1980

TGO

@bocadosdefilosofia

@dias-de-la-ira-1

[whisperofthewaves]

through clenched teeth: it is fine. it is ok. you knew yesterday it was a possibility that your flatmate will work from home today. you were warned beforehand. you are able to perform your planned activities even though every fucking sound she generates is like cheese grater on an exposed nerve. this. is. fine.

[rainhadecopas69]

Alone. Cold. Hard. Complicado

Profundo e escuro, turvo, intrigante,

Ensurdecedor e calmo até demais.

Denso, subjetivo e intangível.

Excitante, instável mas estável e concreto.

O mergulhar no fundo sem pular na água.

O gosto doce e cítrico sem degustar de fato algo.

O som mais envolvente no silêncio mais alto que existe.

A melodia que faz os corpos dançarem sem música,

No tom que ainda nem existiu.

O calor muito longe do sol ou da luz. A energia do movimento inerce da alma,

Na viagem do consciente sob as dimensões mais altas do universo, corremos na floresta do talvez,

Do inexplicável inexistente sentimento que nos toma como uma onda.

Nos imerge e leva pra algum lugar que sequer existe de fato.

Nada existe, e tudo está lá. A verdade.

A falta...

O buraco sem fim na existência humana.

[omgvalki]

alguien que haya leído este libro??vale la pena??

[toastedcinnamonflakes]

Humbling myself by reminding me that everything I like is elitist garbage and used for oppression. I'm directly benefitting from the system and all my likes and interests are elitist. I am an elitist. The things I like are elitist. I am the enemy.

[ariel-seagull-wings]

Hey Ariel.

As an X-Men fan, I wanted to know.

Why do so many X-Men fans and even writers have, let's be a real, a massive superiority complex?

As I'm sure you know by now, for about a decade, the X-Men comics have had a bad track record when it came to writing characters outside of their bubble of the Marvel Universe.

Being that they were painfully written out of character and in rather non-flattering lights.

ESPECIALLY Captain America.

Usually portraying them as being against mutants (when they've been shown before not to be).

And the worst part about all this is that they try to say that the X-Men are the only REAL heroes in the Marvel Universe and that the other heroes ain't shit!

The ONLY one who doesn't get this is Spider-Man.

But as we all know by now, Spidey gets written with more respect in literally every other title than his own.

It's pretty clearly done to make the X-Men look good, but ironically enough, it doesn't.

If anything, it makes them look like a bunch of narcissistic, self-serving assholes who love to make their problems everyone else's and shame people for their issues even when they have nothing to do with it.

And I find that incredibly disingenuous.

Like, these motherfuckers have saved the entire world multiple times and tend suddenly, they're being shamed and told that they're not real heroes?!

Blow me.

I think the most egregious is in the case of the Fantastic Four.

Like, among all the heroes of Marvel, they're arguably the most respected.

Like, these guys literally save all reality on a weekly basis.

But then you'll have Cyclops causally shaming them and even threatening to take their son against their (and maybe even his) will.

But I guess that's to be expect since most other comic fandoms don't respect the Fantastic Four (largely thanks to their horrible track record with movies).

I'm glad we're FINALLY moving past this era since in the recent comics, we've seen Cyclops and Captain Marvel are committed to having their respective teams being allies who have each other's back.

But still, why did so many fans and writers just love to trash the other heroes?

Side Note: You remember those pieces of fan art that had the X-Men dogging on The Avengers? Like that one with Cyclops having a class that basically taught that The Avengers are losers and had pictures of several members up on a board with the word "Bitch" written over them. Yeah, I'm so glad that phase finally died out.

Eh ... it's a bit more complicated then "superiority complex", and I will need to give you a brief history and geography lesson along with writing office analysis for context...

So I'm brazilian, and my country has a very complicated love and hate relationship with US American Pop Culture since it started being exported to us during the Cold War (And by complicated I mean that intelectual circles even were split about the Electric Guitar being used in our music, with some youths embracing it in the 1960s while other youths went to the streets to protest against it as a Imperialist Symbol). This complicated relationship affects as well the perception of superheroes, arguably the quintessential American Genre of comic books: some people go to the Golden and Silver Ages and see the characters as simbols of progressive figures of cultural exchange instead of domination, while others who lived enough to see the conservartive forces of Capital dominate the industry of superhero comics and films, can't separate the influence that military powers exerced in the narrative, specially post 9/11.

Without mentioning that even color of clothes can be triggering: so you see the clothes of Captain America in the Red and White And Blue spangles, if you are in the US, you are more likely to see first the hero who punched Hitler in the face as stand against fascist opression, but if you are Latin American like us, you see the modern Uncle Sam, the figure that simbolizes American Invasion. With the MCU encarnations being now the primary way that people know the Avengers, with Military Influence over blockbusters being secret to nobody, is inevitable that they become defenders to the status quo and revolutionaries who question American Intervention become villanized, so while the figures might not be literal cops to an american audience, to us they are simbolically the World Cops.

The X Men adaptations become more engaging for us because they work outside the American Goverment: they live in their own house their leader purchased, most members are born in other countries, they have to constantly fight not to be exterminated by the authorities of the american goverment, ocasionally try to trust said authorities only to be betrayed again and again, deal with issues of assimilation vs embracing their difference and creating their own culture and society, changing within the system vs changing the whole system, pacificism vs guerrilla, which are themes very rooted in the history of Latin America, so is expected they will be embraced by us as symbols of rebellion

Fandom action and reaction also hasto be considered: in one country it may appear that a fan of Avengers might be the comics "underdog" in the sense of not selling much the way the X books sold, while in other country it was considered acceptable to be an Avengers fan because they were considered "the masculine team" while the X Men fans, identifying with the queer coding and social commentary of the mutant metaphor, would be target of homophobia from people in the Avengers fandom, and in the proccess while the homophobia was not the fault of their characters and writers per se, it still left a trauma that tarnished them in the eye of some bullied X-Men fans.

As from a writing office standpoint, there is also the aspect of the Shared Universe, that has been a Double-Edged Sword for Marvel when it comes to their worldbuing: the way the Shared Universe was conceived in the 60s was mainly a publicit stunt, a way to make readers buy other titles, not necessarily a slowly well planed project. There is no way every reader will have time or engagement to collect and read every other title besides the main series they follow of their favorite character or team, AND the writing offices were still as much separated from each other as DC Offices were.

When the company expects each series to be independent from one another, yet still hold to the concept of Shared Universe as a selling tool, there will be, and has been, problems: writers each are put in the bubble of their own series rather than be constantly updating on reading other titles and collaborating with one another to make the Universe feel coherent and cohese, so characters will also be put in their bubbles, and readers will ask "Why aren't the heroes and teams helping one another and discussing this issue that concerns everyone together when they all live in the same world and mostly in the same cities (New York and San Francisco)?"

So one may say that X-Men writers don't know how to write the Avengers... but people forget the reverse can also be true, with Avengers and solo hero writers having trouble writing X-Men books and characters.

There is no understanding between writers of each others characters and no team work behind the scenes, then how can you expect that readers will get invested in aquiring different titles/team books instead of becoming tribalist for one particular hero or team? How can they really share the Same Universe?

Civil War might not have been the event it was if Avengers and X-Men characters were put in the same book to discuss the situation, because mutants have the experience with the violence of Registration Acts and would talk Tony Stark out of supporting, which would make impossible the Team Iron Man x Team Captain America fight that the company wanted to sell.

The Fantastic Four might save the planet Earth from Cosmic Beings like Galactus, but the Sentinels would still come for the son of Reed and Sue, Franklin, so is understandable that mutants will ask the question of "What use is saving the Planet if those who are born on Earth like us still will try to kill us for existing?". That Reed tried experiments to supress Franklin's X gene (before the retcon) while saying condescendingly "You are a child, you don't what you want" reminding people of cisstraight parents in denial of their children being queer didn't help.

One Incredible Hulk comic had Bruce Banner say to an alternate older Scott Summers that "Mutant Fear was never prejudice, just a correct fear that people born with superpowers would run out of control and harm humans, just like people feared the Hulk would do and did".

Which if you only read Hulk, might sound true ...

But if you follow the X-Men for decades, you will bring this argument into question because there were mutants that never didn't harm anyone and were experimented upon, enslaved and were targets of genocide, God Love Man Kills, the graphic novel that extablished the danger faced by mutants along with the Days of Future Past storyline, even showing us the Reverend Stryker killing his mutant newborn son just because "he looked different" and soon killing his wife as well for giving birth to a mutant child, which is a context a casual reader has no obligation to have, but a professional writer working at MARVEL should have, then obviously fans will get frustrated, specially when a lot of X-Men fans are from marginalized comunities and see in this speech by Bruce Banner the same speech some people give to them when they bring their own opression:

"You are exagerating, you see prejudice where there is none, this is just victimization!"

And of course, there is the Elephant in the Room called House of M: with Joe Quesada erroneously thinking that minority meant "small quantity of people" and not the actual meaning of "sociopolitically underrepresented and opressed population that often is the majority in quantity", the editorial mandate to reduce mutant characters trough a Decimation happened at Marvel, but instead of choosing an X-book adjacent character to be responsible for said Decimation, an Avengers character was choosen, and Wanda Maximoff suffered with a poorly written mental breakdown to be used as an easy Mcguffin to put mutantkind in the brink of extinction.

It probably also didn't help that since there was the whole "Movie rights battle where Fox held the movie rights to the X Men characters" Marvel itself was spitefully trying to reduce the proeminence of the X Men in comics to push other characters like the Inhumans... who are a royal family with a history of practicing slavery and eugenics.

This caused an important concern for fans: if a company already tries to erase and silence the METAPHORICAL marginalized characters even though they have been their best selling series since the 80s, what chance does NON METAPHORICAL marginalized characters have?

Basically: different writing teams not understanding each other's characters is a simpton of an editorial problem in the comics industry, and fans reacting with mistrust over other teams and fandoms like the Avengers and Fantastic Four is a coping and defense response.

@thealmightyemprex @professorlehnsherr-almashy @themousefromfantasyland @the-blue-fairie

[velvetvexations]

As a nonbinary person my biggest problem with enby has always been the fact that it's not ever felt like a word. It's quite literally just saying nb out loud but written out. It's never felt like a real identifier. For as much as the shitty I'm just a girl jokes or saturdays are for the boys sayings are like. Scuffed and bad. The words actually sound like they fit and flow in the sentences. Saying I'm gonna go hang out with the enbies later doesn't sound like a word. It sounds like I'm saying an abbreviation in place of a word. Because that's what it is at the end of the day. It never stopped being just an abbreviation of nonbinary but longer this time and it kinda pisses me off that it's treated like a really Good word. It isn't infantilising or anything bc tbh. It's not any more or less mature than someone just saying the damn letters out loud, but it sure as fuck lacks any sense of formality. People can say they're an enby all they want but it doesn't feel like an identifier if I called myself one, it feels like a descriptor. I think nonbinary people deserve a word for themselves that isn't just. The term for their identity but shortened and then made long again. Especially considering that we don't exactly refer to men and women as ems and doubleyous do we. It's petty, but it keeps me from liking it all the same. If a term that took absolutely Zero Effort to come up with is something that a Big group of who it was supposed to describe really don't fucking like, I dont think it's that big of a deal to put in a little more legwork to make something different

That's an interesting perspective. I guess every word needs an origin?

Idk maybe it would be easier if we made some distinction between internal/personal gender (how you conceptualize yourself) and external/social gender (how you are gendered and treated by others) cis people and post transition trans people usually have an internal gender and an External gender that somewhat match. Pre transition trans people have mismatched internal and external genders, which can produce dysphoria. I personally don't have much of an internal gender at all, but my external gender is "woman" based on presentation and socialization. When i say "trans women are seen as men" what I actually mean is "non-passing trans women are perceived and treated as men by transphobes, a role which has a very narrow set expectations and requirements in order to fully access its privileges, otherwise they get the same treatment as all queer/"failed" men, which is different from the experiences of people gendered externally as women in a lot of complex ways." there's no universal experience of gender and no such thing as a "real" man or woman, that's what "gender is a social construct" MEANS. But still! Our society treats men/boys different than women/girls. And the way people are treated affects how they behave! It's not misgendering anyone to point out and analyze those differences, it's just sociology and gender theory. It can be trans inclusive if you're not an idiot.

Post-transition trans people still generally risk discovery even if they're completely stealth. Besides that, I think it's too close to saying one is that gender also if we split it between the two, since why would one take precedence over the other when gender is fake either way? Identity is personal and people who tell you you're wrong about your identity are just incorrect, it's really simple.

someone i see often in transmisogyny discourse (not gonna drop the user) liked a post saying "intersexism isn't real and it's transmisogyny to say it is", unliked it and denied it when it was brought up to them, and is now pretending it didn't happen. what do you even do about that

I have no idea who you're talking about, but that's bad, I guess?

The ‘transmasc headcannons are all self indulgent, illogical and antifeminist. but transfem headcannons are all intelectual, narratively complex, feminist praxis’ thing reminds me of the ‘yaoi is all self indulgent, illogical and antifeminist. but yuri is all intelectual, narratively complex, feminist praxis’ thing (idk how common it is in fandoms that aren’t homestuck (cus istg that fucking fandom))

it's so deeply annoying

ngl I've been repeating "fellas, is it transphobic to admit that transphobes are transphobic?" ever since you said it (or at least something close to it? I don't remember if this is a direct quote or paraphrase because I was very tired that day) in one of the ask compilations because it sums up the whole thing so succinctly and also just feels good to say

Sorry about all the assclowns who are so eager to assert their bone-deep conviction that yes it totally is -__-;;

we live in a bad timeline

For the "trans-inclusive" cis girls who still insist "transmascs are BETRAYING WOMANHOOD" -

Riiiight...so, COMPLETELY irrelevant question, but how did you and your friends feel about the weird girl in middle and high school? You know, the anime fan with the punk clothes and dyed hair? Started hanging out more with boys than girls around the middle of the year? You DID extend the "bonds of sisterhood" to her too, didn't you?

No? You called her a traitor and a freak too? Even before she started hanging out more with the boys, you thought she was just being a holier-than-thou snob because she wasn't interested in the topics usually considered "girl talk"?

Yeah, I can't imagine why she would have felt more comfortable with the boys either...truly a mystery...yeah she really did totally betray you...yep...

women throw around "pickme" like it's the worst possible thing to be but most pickmes have a pretty good reason for being pickmes and women who complain about them should do some introspection

I think Androhomophobia is the word for MLMs speaking on their unique oppression!

noted!

"Why do trans men need a special word" why do trans women need a special word 🎤 do you just consider mens experiences the default 🤔

for transfem TRFs: because men is what trans women are transitioning away from so it literally was the default for them and they have a hard time understanding the idea that some people want the thing they don't want and don't want the thing they want

for transmasc TRFs: because of course they want to think they're the alpha dogs society revolves around they're all misogynists

As someone who wasn’t on tumblr when that “kill all transmascs” post was going around, what was that about?

I reeeeally hope there’s some context that I’m missing and it wasn’t just one of those “kill all men” jokes from 2012 with “trans” inserted into it.

Also, it’s really disheartening to see this kind of behavior from people who you would otherwise trust.

if it's older than this past March I wasn't around either but there was a post going around just a couple weeks ago

As a nonbinary person: the entire enby thing could be fixed if we just could have terminology without it being relentlessly mocked.

Some people are going to be uncomfortable with enby because it sounds similar to baby and that can feel infantilizing. Some people will not think it’s infantilizing. Some people will not care. This is normal. I think enban is a good term even if enby wasn’t made to be used similarly to boy and girl. I think more explicitly nonbinary terms are good. I want to have more terms to describe myself. Only having enby is annoying.

Yeah like...not having the infrastructure of entrenched and codified language is difficult.

I think there's a degree to which this sort of thing is "spreading", insofar as I see an uptick in random cis people making flippant transandrophobic jokes and then acting like it's antifeminist to disagree. HOWEVER, I also think the hardcore TRFs' views are escalating over time to the point that when their posts break containment they often sound so obviously fucked up that people who aren't as discourse-poisoned are noticing it, rather than just blindly boosting like "Trans rights, I guess!".

the legacy of trans radical feminism: making cis people a little more transphobic

did that one op imply trans men can all just girlmode like its no big deal and takes no effort. like i do girlmode at work but that entails shaving daily and trying to keep my voice high despite having dropped like two octaves.

i feel like all that saves the façade is that my coworkers have known me since pre-T plus my tits are gigantic

he did imply that!

I think all the transmascs on here talking about how being seen as a girl is a privilege should try being a girl not wearing a bra. Or binding. Just letting them hang out. It's amazing how poorly you'll get treated. Bonus points if you're also obviously autistic and generally GNC at the same time

(On that note I think there should be more of a movement for people with boobs to not have to wear a bra because they are so uncomfortable for me and make me extremely dysphoric and I'm sure I can't be the only one-)

That used to be a feminist thing but it seems like everyone retreated from that issue.

What are your thoughts on the idea that TERFs genuinely do hate men the most and the only reason they specifically target trans women is because they see them as men that are "trying to sneak into womens spaces"? I think it makes sense on the basis that they treat trans women badly but sometimes ally with cis men who also hate us because those men aren't "explicitly trying to trick them"

I mean yeah exactly lol TERFs see trans women as men in the middle of actively doing a misogyny or trying to perform a fetish in front of them

[thecanvasofmadness]

Muerto por el amor.

Giovanni Papini

“Amé a muchas mujeres y fui correspondido por ellas, pero no son esos amores los que me han llevado al umbral de la muerte. Quizá recuerde usted algunas palabras que le dije en París, estando alrededor de la mesa de aquel café. Lo que temía se ha realizado: soy víctima de la inaudita y universal belleza del mundo. Estoy consumido y muerto por mi sensibilidad jamás adormecida, por mi obstinado entusiasmo, por mi irrefrenable eretismo intelectual, por mi infinito amor hacia todos los seres, hacia todas las cosas.

"Voy por una calle, entro en un museo o en un bosque, en un palacio o en una taberna, en una feria campesina o en un jardín de suburbio, y paso así de una maravilla a otra, de un éxtasis a otro. Todo me atrae y me aferra, me inflama, me causa sorpresa y maravilla. Entiéndalo usted bien: todo, sin exceptuar ninguna cosa, todo cuanto veo me fuerza a amar y a admirar: una piedra jaspeada, una flor moribunda, una joven florecida, una pobre prostituta ajada, un árbol sin hojas, las manchas y musgos de una vieja pared, un pensamiento insólito y temerario, un torso de mármol ennegrecido, un dibujo hecho por un niño, una oveja que come hierbas en el campo, la puma del mar, la nube del atardecer y la estrella de la noche; todas las infinitas ostentaciones del universo me conmueven, me inundan de felicidad, me obligan a deshacer en mil palpitaciones mi corazón de eterno enamorado.

"Y no le hablo del arte, que tiene sobre mí un poder irresistible, pavoroso, lacerante. He viajado mucho, pero, cuántas veces, no pudiendo resistir las congojas causadas por repentinas nostalgias, partí apresuradamente para ir a ver la Sainte Chapelle o la Resurrezione de Pier della Francesca, el Sindaco del Villaggio que se admira en el Museo de El Cairo, o la Galatea de Rafael, o los Goya que hay en el Prado, las esculturas de Olimpia, un retrato de Bronzino o de Rembrandt. Era como un amante angustiado por la lejanía del ser amado, que recorre miles de millas para ver, aunque sea por unos pocos minutos, los ojos, la boca, la cabellera, las manos que le han embrujado.

"Siento fuertemente, y por eso amo fuerte y perdidamente. Tengo también la malhadada pasión de hacer sentir a los demás lo que yo siento, de querer persuadirles a que amen lo que amo. Por esto siempre estoy excitado, me siento feliz y lacerado, torturado por el recuerdo y la espera, siempre estoy en el fuego del incendio, siempre me veo en movimiento sobre la Tierra, siempre intranquilo, lleno de gozo y de locuacidad.

"Usted no imagina qué dilapidación de fuerzas, qué gasto de nervios y de sangre me cuesta ese perpetuo amor. Desde hace muchos años casi no puedo dormir, y frecuentemente me olvido de comer. Para el que ama desesperadamente al amor, toda hora de sueño es una hora de ausencia y de pecado, de verguenza, de martirio. Si el universo es una perenne posibilidad de hacer maravillosos descubrimientos, si la vida es un milagro continuo, si el amor, el amor desinteresado y fiel es la única ocupación digna de un hombre, entonces la indiferencia y el olvido son culpas inexpiables contra el espíritu y contra Dios. Pero esa llama interna me ha consumido, me derrite, me destruye, me mata. Siento que no puedo resistir más, que estoy ya en vísperas del fin. Hércules pudo arrancarse de encima su vestido de fuego, pero mi fuego está en lo interior, me quema hasta las últimas fibras en cada instante. Perdóneme que no le pueda decir cosas diversas, que no pueda darle otras noticias respecto de mi persona. Quizá no volveremos a vemos. Acuérdese de mí. El amor ha saturado y colmado mi vida, el amor me mata, ¡adiós!"

[froidefille]

Day 15: a fic over 50k

📚 Former Things Come to Mind by @dodgerkedavra

Draco/Harry, 64k, E

Summary:

Harry Potter has had a headache for seven and a half years.

Welcome back to the acustic set dodgerkedavra!AU 🤩

Because somehow dodgerkedavra has not only written many awesome stories, but has also somehow created her own alternative version of the HP universe across her fics.

So if you feel like reading about Harry being a good boy 😇, Lucius not being awful (which is my new favourite thing) and Ron being a hot healer besotted with his auror wife Pansy while Hermione is intelectually and otherwise entangled with Blaise – you’ve come to the right place!

I personally especially appreciate the dynamics of the Golden Trio in this scenario. They are truly a Golden Trio again and not a Golden 2+1. Aaaand there's always a bath which is always a plus 🛀🏻

The plot itself is actually too good to give away but let’s just say our favourite auror partners Potter and Parkinson are on the case! So, just a little snippet of the events: It’s literally 20 minutes after the Final Battle. Harry falls apart in a small flat in Croydon. Draco puts him back together (in a bath xd). In the morning he is gone.

Harry is pining away, body and soul, for years not knowing that *spoiler* has actually *spoiler* in order to *spoiler*. They are reunited years later and forced into a bond that doesn’t take.

I will now leave y’all for a minute to figure that out – have a nice Monday at AO3 and make sure to flail haplessly in the comments over the breathtaking scene when Draco walks into Harry's dream near the end and how it was beautiful and made you cry a little bit.

Thank you for today’s prompt @hprecfest and @dodgerkedavra for your service to the fandom *salute*

[scotianostra]

On December 19th 1887 Balfour Stewart, the Scottish meteorologist and geophysicist, died.

Balfour Stewart was born in Edinburgh, hje was an intelectually precocious child, and entered St-Andrews University at age thirteen, subsequently transfering to the University of Edinburgh to study natural philosophy. Bending to parental pressures, upon graduating he embarked on business, which he however abandoned and return to the University of Edinburgh in 1853 to work as an assistant to James D. Forbes.

In 1859 he became Director of Kew Observatory, where he remained until 1870, and finished his career as Porfessor of Physics at Owens College in Manchester. He was elected to the Royal Society in 1862, awarded their Rumford Medal in 1868, and was elected to the Royal Astronomical Society in 1867.

Stewart's true forte was in experimental physics, but many of his theoretical ideas, though often lacking mathematical rigour, anticipated many later key developments in nineteenth century Physics, particularly in thermodynamics. He essentially established, in a purely empirical and almost intuitive manner, the radiation Laws later obtained by Gustav Kirchhoff. Stewart also held a life-long fascination with the possible link between terrestrial magnetism and meteorological phenomena. He first postulated the existence of a high, electrically conducting atmospheric layer which he aptly named "ionosphere", and was the primary driver behind the study of possible planetary influences on sunspots carried our during his directorship at Kew.

In his later years, Stewart became interested in the the compatibility between science and religious, and also launched himself into the scientific study of psychic phenomena. These, in particular, drew very mixed reviews, to the point that his friend and colleague Peter Guthrie Tait, in the obituary he wrote in memory of Stewart, described him as a "one of the most loveable of men, modest and unassuming, but full of the most weird and grotesque ideas".

Severely wounded in 1870 in a train crash from which he never fully recovered, he died on this day december 1887.

There's a lot more on the man here https://www.aboutorkney.com/biography/balfour-stewart-m-a-ll-d-f-r-s/

[partywithoutsmiling]

On the topic of Brozone

When it comes to their parents, family and family situation, Part 1:

Expanding bit of my personal headcanon on this- well, mostly personal in the way that I use it as a basis for all my AUs/Stories without fault; basically, I consider this 'Universal Headcanon' when it comes to any of my Stories, while the Stories by themselves can have Headcanon/Lore that is unique just to them XD

(Like, for an example, the luminescent markings in Moonlit AU are unique just for that particular AU, and you won't see it in Rock Beast or Wanderer!Branch)

Anyway, as I hinted in this post, I headcanon the Brozone Bros as being of mixed herritage: half-Pop and half-Rock

Biologically, it makes them slightly less hardy when it comes to Winter, and little bit more feral looking compared to other Pop Trolls, something that got more prominent the older they grew

Age - Using Branch's hatching as a base line (at 0), I headcanon the ages thus: - JD at 16, Spruce/Bruce at 14/13, Clay at 12 and Floyd at 11

Pop Troll Capitol - John Dory had hatched at a time where Pop Troll territory (expanded upon in this answered ask) had already started shrinking, but still boasted several strong settlements. However with those Settlements slowly disappearing (And unknown to the Pop Trolls, harvested by Bergens), Pop Trolls started naturally migrate towards the Troll Tree, at this point considered the Capitol 'City' of sorts; - However, everyone desired to live there, considered to be not only the pinacle of the high life but also place of endless oppoturnities, home for especially talented Trolls- not something little half-rock troll JD could ever hope to achieve, but could at least dream about; - A dream that started to be more of an ambitious goal, when more of his brothers hatched, and JD, being the oldest and feeling responsible for the happiness of his siblings, wanted to get them out of the backwater settlement they are growing up in- an oppoturnity that presented, when their Grandmother, Rosiepuff, offered to house them while they tried to prove themselves

Boy Band 'Aristocracy' - Being part of a succesful band- especially part of a boy band- was a prestigious status, as close as to aristocracy as the hierarchy in the Pop Troll Tribe could get. The most succesful band gained the priviledge of living in the Troll Tree, along with all the other 'gifted' Pop Trolls, and were free to interact with the Royal Family on more personal level - Brozone was considered especially progidious; not only they were able to harmonize better than anyone else, but they were also the youngest to really 'make it' and stand out from all the hopefuls

Nepotism? - The early Brozone- the one without Branch in it- was not starved for talent, but it was largely thanks to their grandmother that they were even allowed the chance - While mixed herritage was not a rare thing to happen in the Tribe- despite ancient conflicts, Trolls tended to trickle back and forth between Kingdoms- none of them ever lived in the Troll Tree, and were it not for Rosiepuff and her known family history, the Brozone would never even get the chance

Barebones Family Tree - Their Pop Half is maternal, with their mother named Mulberry; born at the Troll Tree, to Rosiepuff and to a troll named Brazen (who I headcanon gathered bit of a fame himself, imagine essentially Troll Frank Sinatra XD), she decided the glamour and glitter life is not something that was for her - Always bit quieter and more of an intelectual, she decided to move out of the Troll Tree and settle in a Village closer to the North - There she managed to meet a Rock Troll named Thorn (Or 'Thornberry', as she came to call him) - Thorn, being a young Troll, had been indulging in the Rock Troll tradition of a Solo Tour (as mentioned in my Wanderer!Branch Lore Dump), which usually happened in the Rock Troll Kingdom but could bleed into other Kingdoms- a habit that brought him literaly crashing on Mulberry's doorstep - In the true opposite attracts fashion and through shenanigans, they eventually fell in love and started family together - Rosiepuff thought it romantic; Brazen was not so accepting - Unknown to most, however, Thorn was not just your average Rock Troll, but the heir to the Rock Throne and an older brother to Thrash (if only by few months) - Thorn kept his sudden family a secret at first, knowing the fact they are Pop wouldn't be accepted, and while his age allowed it, he flitted back and forth between them and Volcano City, making him a rather spotty presence in his sons' lives - Eventually, however, his flightly behaviour started to be frowned upon by the Rock Trolls, as age wise he was long past when it was acceptable to travel around solo- and so he planned a longer trip to Volcano City, if only to tell his father (the King at the time) to fuck off and pass the rule down to Thrash (This didn't really work out, as he had not been allowed to leave after that, leaving Mulberry to struggle to support four children) - JD at 14yo, Spruce/Bruce at 12/11, Clay at 10, Floyd at 9 - It was his disappearence that had Mulberry cave to JD's wheedling to give the Boy Band a shot, and after talking it through with Rosiepuff, the boys moved with their Grandmother while Mulberry stayed behind in hopes that Thorn will come back

(Part two here)

[jgmail]

La ideología de la mismidad: Una crítica del igualitarismo

Por Alexander Raynor

Traducción de Juan Gabriel Caro Rivera

La ideología de la mismidad de Alain de Benoist ofrece una crítica que invita a la reflexión sobre el igualitarismo y el universalismo modernos, defendiendo de forma convincente la importancia de la diversidad y el particularismo en las sociedades humanas. En este volumen delgado pero denso, de Benoist aporta su considerable destreza intelectual a lo que considera uno de los conflictos ideológicos definitorios de nuestro tiempo: la tensión entre homogeneización y diferenciación.

De Benoist comienza trazando el desarrollo histórico de lo que denomina la «ideología de la igualdad»: la creencia de que todos los seres humanos son fundamentalmente idénticos e intercambiables, y que las diferencias entre individuos y culturas son superficiales y carecen de importancia. Sostiene que esta ideología tiene profundas raíces en el pensamiento occidental, desde el universalismo cristiano hasta el racionalismo de la Ilustración y el individualismo liberal moderno.

Aunque reconoce las nobles intenciones que subyacen a gran parte del pensamiento universalista, de Benoist sostiene que, llevada al extremo, la «ideología de la igualdad» conduce a un aplanamiento de la diversidad humana y a una pérdida de las identidades y comunidades particulares que dan riqueza y sentido a la vida. Defiende de forma persuasiva que la verdadera igualdad no significa borrar todas las distinciones, sino respetar las diferencias al tiempo que se afirma una humanidad común.

Uno de los puntos fuertes del libro es el análisis matizado del concepto de igualdad. Sostiene que la igualdad matemática no es lo mismo que la igualdad proporcional o la equidad y que perseguir ciegamente una noción abstracta de igualdad a menudo conduce a la injusticia en la práctica. En su lugar, aboga por una comprensión de la igualdad basada en la reciprocidad y el reconocimiento mutuo entre individuos y grupos diferentes, pero igualmente valiosos.

De Benoist se muestra más convincente cuando habla de la importancia de la comunidad y la pertenencia para el florecimiento humano. Basándose en pensadores como Ferdinand Tönnies, contrasta la solidaridad orgánica de las verdaderas comunidades con el individualismo atomizado de las sociedades liberales modernas. Aunque no romantiza las formas sociales premodernas, defiende con firmeza que hemos perdido algo vital en la transición a la sociedad de masas, y que la recuperación de un auténtico sentido de comunidad es esencial para abordar muchos de los males sociales contemporáneos.

La crítica del autor al individualismo liberal es incisiva y oportuna. Sostiene que la concepción liberal del individuo como titular abstracto de derechos desvinculado de todo contexto social es incoherente desde el punto de vista filosófico y perjudicial en la práctica. Los seres humanos son fundamentalmente sociales y están moldeados por su contexto cultural: sólo podemos comprendernos realmente a nosotros mismos y prosperar a través de nuestras relaciones y comunidades. De Benoist sostiene que el olvido de este hecho básico por parte de la teoría liberal conduce a una visión empobrecida de la naturaleza humana y la sociedad.

De Benoist defiende el valor de las distintas culturas e identidades. Sostiene que la verdadera universalidad sólo puede alcanzarse a través de la particularidad: que accedemos a la experiencia humana universal precisamente a través de nuestras herencias y comunidades culturales específicas. Esto me parece una forma más madura y matizada de política identitaria, que afirma la igual dignidad de todos los pueblos al tiempo que preserva la diversidad cultural.

El debate del libro sobre el federalismo y la subsidiariedad como alternativas a los Estados-nación centralizados es especialmente interesante. De Benoist aboga por un modelo de comunidades e identidades anidadas y superpuestas como forma de conciliar unidad y diversidad. Esta visión de la «unidad en la diversidad» ofrece una alternativa convincente tanto al nacionalismo rígido como al cosmopolitismo desarraigado.

La Ideología de la mismidad es una contribución importante y oportuna a los debates en torno a la identidad, la comunidad y la diversidad en el siglo XXI. En un momento en que muchas sociedades se enfrentan a cuestiones como la inmigración, el multiculturalismo y la identidad nacional, de Benoist ofrece un marco filosóficamente rico para reflexionar sobre estos temas.

Se esté o no de acuerdo con todas las conclusiones de de Benoist, su llamamiento a una renovada apreciación de la diversidad y el arraigo humanos es profundamente convincente. En una época de globalización y cultura de masas, su defensa de las identidades y comunidades particulares como fundamento de un humanismo verdaderamente universal se antoja vital y necesaria.

Para cualquier persona interesada en cuestiones de cultura, identidad y comunidad en el mundo moderno, La ideología de la mismidad es una lectura esencial. De Benoist ha producido una obra de genuina perspicacia y originalidad que merece un amplio compromiso y debate.

Fuente: https://www.arktosjournal.com/cp/149992425

[waterloo-carte]

Pt: Se você pudesse escolher um personagem (um arquétipo), para que você possa receber toda a sua informação, da sua consciência (isso é, toda a característica e essência dada ao personagem), intelectual, emocional, estrategista, filosofia de vida, etc. Ah, você pode também escolher ou sua consciência por completo, ou apenas uma determinada parte, como esse a intelectual ou emocional. Pode ser qualquer um, de qualquer universo, mitologia, personalidades reais (históricas ou modernas), filme, série, desenhos, quadrinho, mangás e até onde sua imaginação levar.  Qual personagem você escolheria e por qual característica/motivo você o escolheria? ____________________________________________________ En: If you could choose a character (an archetype), so that you can receive all your information, your consciousness (that is, the whole characteristic and essence given to the character), intellectual, emotional, strategist, philosophy of life, etc. Ah, you can also choose either your consciousness completely or just a certain part, such as intellectual or emotional. It can be anyone, from any universe, mythology, real personalities (historical or modern), film, series, drawings, comic, manga and as far as your imagination takes.  Which character would you choose, and for which feature/reason would you choose it?

____________________________________________________Spn: Si pudieras elegir un personaje (un arquetipo), para que puedas recibir toda tu información, tu conciencia (es decir, toda la característica y esencia dada al personaje), intelectual, emocional, estratega, filosofía de la vida, etc. Ah, usted también puede elegir o su conciencia por completo o solo una determinada parte, como ese a intelectual o emocional. Puede ser cualquier persona, de cualquier universo, mitología, personalidades reales (histórico o moderno), películas, series, dibujos, cómic, manga y en la medida de su imaginación.   ¿Qué personaje elegirías y para qué función/razón lo elegirías?

[rice-pudding-slaps]

Bit of Jellicle Songs for Jellicle Cats for the Santiago opening night!

Translation under the cut

The Jellicle is able to do

Only a Jellicle can be jellicle

Only a Jellicle is jellicle

Only a Jellicle is jellicle

Only a Jellicle is jellicle

Jellicle, Jellicle song

for a Jellicle cat

a jellicle, Jellicle song

a jellicle, Jellicle song

Agility and happiness

the theatrical and dramatical

with a lot of ferocity and faithfulness

the casual cat and causal cat

with sensuality and [iconicity?]

the feline shows its vanity

universality, responsibility, and spontaneous

authenticity

The anti-radical

the fiscal and clerical

the triunfal and intelectual

A jellicle, Jellicle song

[desenhouniversalparaaprendizagem]

Deficiência Intelectual ou Transtornos de Aprendizados

A deficiência intelectual e os transtornos de aprendizagem são condições diferentes, embora ambas possam afetar a capacidade de aprender. A deficiência intelectual é um transtorno do neurodesenvolvimento caracterizado por um nível de funcionamento intelectual significativamente abaixo da média e dificuldades adaptativas. Por outro lado, os transtornos de aprendizagem envolvem dificuldades específicas em áreas como leitura, escrita ou matemática, sem que haja um comprometimento generalizado do funcionamento intelectual.

1. Planeje com o Desenho Universal para Aprendizagem (DUA)

Organize suas lições oferecendo múltiplas formas de acesso (aúdio, imagem, texto simplificado) e diferentes opções de expressão (apresentações orais, maquetes, vídeos). Assim, todos participam e demonstram o que sabem de maneiras que fazem sentido para eles.

2. Simplifique e “fatie” as tarefas

Divida atividades longas em etapas claras e breves. Use checklists visuais ou cartões numerados para mostrar a sequência. Isso reduz a sobrecarga cognitiva e permite pequenas vitórias frequentes.

3. Estruture a rotina e sinalize transições

Horários fixos, “relógio visual” e avisos de 5 minutos antes de mudar de atividade ajudam a diminuir ansiedade e a manter o foco.

4. Valorize o ritmo individual

Use avaliações formativas (observação, portfólios) e permita tempo extra ou provas adaptadas. O objetivo é medir conhecimento, não velocidade.

5. Crie parcerias

Trabalhe com familiares, psicopedagogos, ocupacionais para alinhar estratégias. A integração escola–casa fortalece habilidades aprendidas.

6. Reconheça cada progresso

Elogios específicos (“Você copiou duas linhas sem ajuda!”) cultivam autoestima e motivação. Pequenos avanços diários constroem grandes conquistas ao longo do ano.

[notasfilosoficas]

“Lo que hoy es una herejía, se suele convertir en la ortodoxia de mañana”

José Luis López Aranguren

José Luis López Aranguren fue un influyente filósofo, ensayista y sociólogo español, nacido el 9 de junio de 1909 en Ávila, España, en el seno de una familia católica de clase media. 

Su infancia transcurrió en un ambiente conservador, fuertemente marcado por la tradición religiosa, lo que influiría profundamente en sus primeros intereses intelectuales. 

Desde joven demostró una gran inclinación por la reflexión ética y el pensamiento teológico, lo que lo llevó a estudiar Filosofía y Letras en la Universidad Central de Madrid, donde se formó bajo la tutela de importantes pensadores del momento.

Durante su juventud, López Aranguren se adentró en el estudio de la filosofía moral, la religión y la cultura, disciplinas que serían fundamentales a lo largo de su carrera.

Sus primeros trabajos estuvieron muy vinculados con el pensamiento cristiano, pero con el paso del tiempo fue alejándose de una perspectiva dogmática para adoptar una postura más crítica y abierta, influida por corrientes como el existencialismo y el pensamiento marxista, aunque sin adherirse plenamente a ninguna ideología concreta.

Su obra filosófica se caracteriza por una profunda preocupación ética y social. Entre sus libros más destacados se encuentran Catolicismo y protestantismo como formas de existencia (1952), donde analiza las diferencias culturales entre ambas religiones desde un enfoque existencialista, y Ética (1958), una de sus obras más influyentes, en la que propone una reflexión sobre la moral no como un conjunto de normas impuestas, sino como una actitud vital. También fue autor de El marxismo como moral (1965), La ética como amor universal (1981), y La crisis de la sociedad (1984), donde mostró una sensibilidad crítica frente a la situación política y cultural de la España de su tiempo.

Durante el franquismo, López Aranguren fue una figura crítica e incómoda para el régimen. Aunque no se consideraba un militante político, su pensamiento comprometido y su defensa de la libertad de conciencia lo pusieron en conflicto con las autoridades. En 1965 fue expulsado de su cátedra en la Universidad Complutense de Madrid tras participar en una protesta estudiantil, lo que generó una gran polémica en los círculos intelectuales. No sería restituido hasta después de la muerte de Franco, en el marco de la transición democrática.

Además de su trabajo como pensador, López Aranguren tuvo una importante labor como divulgador en prensa y televisión, acercando el pensamiento filosófico al gran público con un lenguaje accesible pero profundo. 

También ejerció influencia como asesor del gobierno en temas de educación y cultura durante la transición.

José Luis López Aranguren falleció el 17 de abril de 1996 en Madrid. Su legado sigue siendo fundamental para entender la evolución del pensamiento filosófico y ético en la España contemporánea. 

Fue un pensador comprometido con la libertad, la justicia y el diálogo entre culturas, y su figura sigue siendo recordada como la de un intelectual íntegro y valiente.

Fuente: Chatgpt.com